UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #20

[LucyRocket]

That might have been the trial. Defence might not call any witnesses. It's happened before

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Its an awful thought really...having to decide on which version is more likely...when in reality neither could be true

Doesnt that happen a lot though, when someone pleads not guilty? The evidence leads the jury to decide on which version is most likely true?

AC pleaded not guilty to murdering little Alesha and concocted all sorts in his defence. It's what they do

 

[Skigh]

Doesnt that happen a lot though, when someone pleads not guilty? The evidence leads the jury to decide on which version is most likely true?

AC pleaded not guilty to murdering little Alesha and concocted all sorts in his defence. It's what they do

I agree. I cannot see PR not putting up a defence. Think if nothing else he wants to still try and convince his family he is just a bit of a pervert who had consensual sex with a drunk girl rather than a sexually deviant predator who committed murderer.

 

[Winterbells]

If you think not guilty of murder - how do you think Libby died?

I think one could decide 'not guilty of murder' whilst also being able to say 'I don't know' to the question of how Libby died.
If the jury were to return a not guilty of murder verdict, it wouldn't be because they've got a better theory as to how Libby died, but that they haven't concluded, without reasonable doubt, from the evidence presented, that PR actively killed her or caused serious bodily harm which he knew could kill her. In the case of a not guilty verdict, the question of how Libby died is for the police to investigate, not for the jury to speculate about.

 

[Winterbells]

I have seen the profile but I'm not a Facebook friend of hers so all I can see her profile photo and almost nothing else, that's why I was curious.

Yep. @mrazda71 That's very true. Unless you're friends with someone on facebook, you can't see much on their page. @wilkela might have found some way around this, but I can't think of one.

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

Doesn’t the judge give the jury some guidance at the end?...if you believe, x y z happened then you must find him guilty, if on the other hand you believe ... you must find him not guilty? (Or is that just on the TV).

 

[elliefant]

Thank you for your reply.

I am open minded to hearing the defence next week but, don't think it will change my mind.

Breathing people in water drown.
Non breathing people cannot put themselves in the water.
I just can't see a way around these basic facts.

The pathologist was not able to rule out the possibility she drowned. I can certainly see that could be a stumbling block for some jury members.

I think the totality of his actions, her vulnerability, the environmental conditions etc would persuade me to vote guilty of murder (based on the murder definition that includes causing harm that he could have been expected to understand could result in death - sorry I don’t recall the proper legal wording).

 

[Loobyloo]

11:17
Libby could have remained alive for an hour in the River Hull
Professor Deakin estimated the water temperature of the River Hull and concluded it was unlikely to be more than 10C.

<rest of quote snipped>

Libby Squire trial live: Latest updates from court

Compared with:

10:55
Libby was badly exposed to the cold
Professor Deakin says a third of Libby’s body was directly exposed to temperatures of -2C on January 31 which is a “significant amount".

Libby Squire trial live: Latest updates from court

I'm puzzled by this, but it's over 50 years since I did any science, so it's probably just ignorance on my part, but if the surrounding temperature is -2C, how could the water be 10C? Why wouldn't it be frozen?
When I read the first temperature, I thought this was possibly an explanation for there being no signs of drowning, as you can't drown in ice...

Can anyone shed some (scientific) light on this?

 

[catgreen]

Compared with:


I'm puzzled by this, but it's over 50 years since I did any science, so it's probably just ignorance on my part, but if the surrounding temperature is -2C, how could the water be 10C? Why wouldn't it be frozen?
When I read the first temperature, I thought this was possibly an explanation for there being no signs of drowning, as you can't drown in ice...

Can anyone shed some (scientific) light on this?

How about this @Loobyloo?
Backcountry Science: Why Don’t Streams Freeze in Winter?

 

[Miss_French]

Crikey! It certainly wasn't a safe area for women at that time. Could he be bike man!

No, he's in prison.

 

[HollyHunter9]

Hi all, only now catching up. Thank you to Jamjim for the updates and anyone else who has contributed links, local info etc. Very much appreciated.

If I was on the jury a couple of things I would be keeping in mind are -

• His previous convictions of stalking, prowling, publicly masturbating to scare women ~ he never ran off when caught out, in fact quite the opposite. He also brushed them off as "silly things" shows he didn't really see any big issue with what he was doing and so was a clear sign of escalating behaviour.
• He had the opportunity to rape Libby in a few other areas; endsleigh park, alleyways, or his car yet he specifically took her to a dark secluded park (with his added knowledge of local CCTV likely knew there was none directly inside the park/fields), a place where he not only visited earlier that evening but in the days before had used a drone to also scope out the area. This for me shows some degree of prior planning beforehand.
• The many different versions of his story: his child scratched his face, his glasses did it, then Libby did it. He told his friend she was not the girl in his car and she tried it on but he rebuffed her, he told the police it was libby in his car and she took her knickers off (from what we've heard from other witnesses she could barely stand up or string a sentence together)
• His behaviour and demeanor in police interviews. "I have seen girls like that before on nights out" girls like that, for me is very telling as to how he views women. Then the smirking...he was enjoying himself, he was enjoying reliving it, part of the thrill for him is actually being caught!
• They are both on CCTV entering the park but only he is seen leaving. The witness said he saw a man walking quickly after the screams stopped. Why would Libby suddenly stop screaming if she still felt in danger? Because I think she had been subdued when he left. Whether he intended to kill her or accidentally did it during rape...he did not try to get her any help.
• Cleaning his car too, this i believe was to get rid of any evidence, hair, fibres, mud on tires from park area.
• I think parts of his story are sprinkled with elements of really happened but he has manipulated his version to suit his defense. I think yes from what we've heard Libby was intoxicated, cold, disoriented, upset and crying for her mum, he mentioned a few times about having a wee and Libby needing to be sick ~ i think perhaps libby did get out to be sick and while she was pre-occupied he was exposing himself, perhaps trying to put on a condom but didn't get time (he said wee to cover himself in case CCTV picked up him exposing himself to her), i think once she clocked what happening she ran,or tried to in the state she was in, ending up down by the river when he catches up to her. In overpowering her during the rape she is smothered or unconscious so he then rolls her into the river and runs off. She had a cut to the inside of her lip and not a huge amount of evidence of drowning which for me indicated she was sadly dead or dying when she entered that water and the evidence also suggests this as the most likely outcome.
• If 2 hours later he was generally worried about her, why not anonymously call an ambulance? "Theres a young girl needs help" sort of thing. Why only spend 4 minutes looking for her? (with 2 minutes of that being the time it took to get there & back). Then proceed to masturbate again in the street (in between going home to watch ). He went back to quickly check she had definitely gone and if he had left any evidence behind.

So with all that, it's a big fat GUILTY from me. Whether he will take the stand I'm not sure, he is brazen and cocky enough too and I actually think he would enjoy it. But the language barrier, wearing of a mask means you can't see his whole face (if he is smirking or trying to portray innocence) and his defence will prob advise against it. But I do believe he is an extremely dangerous individual who, given the chance would go straight back out and do it again.

 

[Kasmeer]

If I was a jury member, based on the evidence shown so far and limited, neutral-toned discussion: Guilty

If my jury discussion was based on this thread though: Guilty of rape, not guilty of murder.

Why? It's an interesting psychological effect I often notice in myself: if I'm undecided on something, seeing attacks or condescending attitudes will not convince me, but push me the other way and make me dig in harder on the points I disagree on, and can make me lose sight of the big picture (in other cases they can make me more and more strong in my view which was already opposing). So reading the repeated suggestions that by questioning anything, posters are unreasonable, wanting to believe his innocence etc, makes me feel equally attacked for sharing the views which led to such comments.

And that in turn leads me to really hyperfocus on the problems with the evidence: quite simply it has not been proved that Libby died by the hand of a person rather than that of Mother Nature, and it has certainly not been proved how 7.5 minutes could be enough for rape, murder, carrying a healthy adult woman some distance to a river, getting her into the river, getting self back out of the river and getting back to the car (some suggestions for timing are good theories, but not proof, and I think it's been repeatedly said here that the jury aren't meant to make up their own evidence or scenarios...). Later posts clearly summing the whole thing up make me realise I'm stuck on the details, and it's most likely on the whole that he is guilty, but these details are important ones which would make it very hard for me to honestly say the case has been proved.

I'm saying all this, not to attack anyone, but more to say I really hope there aren't people on the jury whose brains work like mine! As jurors like me combined with anyone too condescending about refusing to accept that other views or questions may be valid (which based on most internet forums is pretty common in the general population ) could result in no verdict or worse. And I don't want him to get away with it: despite my opinion about the level of proof, I am certain he's responsible for Libby's death, and very likely by murder, while it's quite clear he'll continue to be very very dangerous to young women, so I want to see the longest possible sentence.

 

[Miss_French]

Breathing people in water drown.

Death by drowning is due to respiratory failure, and it's not just water in the lungs.

There is a mechanism called a laryngospasm, where just a tiny amount of water being inhaled causes the vocal cords to close the windpipe and prevent oxygen getting to the lungs. It's rare, but it does happen and can be fatal, and in such cases there is little evidence of water in the lungs.

 

[wilkela]

If she lay down by the river bank she would not be in the water.

ok I can't explain what I mean ,I don't know how describe edge of river- river bank- that's what I found in google translate it may be wrong word I don't know. we know this river rise and she could lie down enough close to edge so her body could be taken by river tide
she could walk to some point till her body give up it could be by the river in her case.
Like in case people who are lost in big forest or mountain they walk till they can't walk any more and they dying .
I think when he came back after 2h he didnt find her where he left her that's why he was convinced she get up and walked away
I don't know why he came back to the field ,check if she is alive, dead ,rape her again throw her in the river -maybe ,but I still think time was too short for rape ,murder and dispose body during his first visit

 

[Marulinka]

Hi all, only now catching up. Thank you to Jamjim for the updates and anyone else who has contributed links, local info etc. Very much appreciated.

If I was on the jury a couple of things I would be keeping in mind are -

• His previous convictions of stalking, prowling, publicly masturbating to scare women ~ he never ran off when caught out, in fact quite the opposite. He also brushed them off as "silly things" shows he didn't really see any big issue with what he was doing and so was a clear sign of escalating behaviour.
• He had the opportunity to rape Libby in a few other areas; endsleigh park, alleyways, or his car yet he specifically took her to a dark secluded park (with his added knowledge of local CCTV likely knew there was none directly inside the park/fields), a place where he not only visited earlier that evening but in the days before had used a drone to also scope out the area. This for me shows some degree of prior planning beforehand.
• The many different versions of his story: his child scratched his face, his glasses did it, then Libby did it. He told his friend she was not the girl in his car and she tried it on but he rebuffed her, he told the police it was libby in his car and she took her knickers off (from what we've heard from other witnesses she could barely stand up or string a sentence together)
• His behaviour and demeanor in police interviews. "I have seen girls like that before on nights out" girls like that, for me is very telling as to how he views women. Then the smirking...he was enjoying himself, he was enjoying reliving it, part of the thrill for him is actually being caught!
• They are both on CCTV entering the park but only he is seen leaving. The witness said he saw a man walking quickly after the screams stopped. Why would Libby suddenly stop screaming if she still felt in danger? Because I think she had been subdued when he left. Whether he intended to kill her or accidentally did it during rape...he did not try to get her any help.
• Cleaning his car too, this i believe was to get rid of any evidence, hair, fibres, mud on tires from park area.
• I think parts of his story are sprinkled with elements of really happened but he has manipulated his version to suit his defense. I think yes from what we've heard Libby was intoxicated, cold, disoriented, upset and crying for her mum, he mentioned a few times about having a wee and Libby needing to be sick ~ i think perhaps libby did get out to be sick and while she was pre-occupied he was exposing himself, perhaps trying to put on a condom but didn't get time (he said wee to cover himself in case CCTV picked up him exposing himself to her), i think once she clocked what happening she ran,or tried to in the state she was in, ending up down by the river when he catches up to her. In overpowering her during the rape she is smothered or unconscious so he then rolls her into the river and runs off. She had a cut to the inside of her lip and not a huge amount of evidence of drowning which for me indicated she was sadly dead or dying when she entered that water and the evidence also suggests this as the most likely outcome.
• If 2 hours later he was generally worried about her, why not anonymously call an ambulance? "Theres a young girl needs help" sort of thing. Why only spend 4 minutes looking for her? (with 2 minutes of that being the time it took to get there & back). Then proceed to masturbate again in the street (in between going home to watch ). He went back to quickly check she had definitely gone and if he had left any evidence behind.

So with all that, it's a big fat GUILTY from me. Whether he will take the stand I'm not sure, he is brazen and cocky enough too and I actually think he would enjoy it. But the language barrier, wearing of a mask means you can't see his whole face (if he is smirking or trying to portray innocence) and his defence will prob advise against it. But I do believe he is an extremely dangerous individual who, given the chance would go straight back out and do it again.

What a brilliant post! You basically summed up exactly how I would think if I was on that jury too!

 

[HollyHunter9]

What a brilliant post! You basically summed up exactly how I would think if I was on that jury too!

Thanks was trying to collate everything we have heard so far and put it together as one big picture. When you list all of the details it becomes abundantly clear there is actually a huge amount of evidence against him.

 

[Chambo1994]

If I was a jury member, based on the evidence shown so far and limited, neutral-toned discussion: Guilty

If my jury discussion was based on this thread though: Guilty of rape, not guilty of murder.

Why? It's an interesting psychological effect I often notice in myself: if I'm undecided on something, seeing attacks or condescending attitudes will not convince me, but push me the other way and make me dig in harder on the points I disagree on, and can make me lose sight of the big picture (in other cases they can make me more and more strong in my view which was already opposing). So reading the repeated suggestions that by questioning anything, posters are unreasonable, wanting to believe his innocence etc, makes me feel equally attacked for sharing the views which led to such comments.

And that in turn leads me to really hyperfocus on the problems with the evidence: quite simply it has not been proved that Libby died by the hand of a person rather than that of Mother Nature, and it has certainly not been proved how 7.5 minutes could be enough for rape, murder, carrying a healthy adult woman some distance to a river, getting her into the river, getting self back out of the river and getting back to the car (some suggestions for timing are good theories, but not proof, and I think it's been repeatedly said here that the jury aren't meant to make up their own evidence or scenarios...). Later posts clearly summing the whole thing up make me realise I'm stuck on the details, and it's most likely on the whole that he is guilty, but these details are important ones which would make it very hard for me to honestly say the case has been proved.

I'm saying all this, not to attack anyone, but more to say I really hope there aren't people on the jury whose brains work like mine! As jurors like me combined with anyone too condescending about refusing to accept that other views or questions may be valid (which based on most internet forums is pretty common in the general population ) could result in no verdict or worse. And I don't want him to get away with it: despite my opinion about the level of proof, I am certain he's responsible for Libby's death, and very likely by murder, while it's quite clear he'll continue to be very very dangerous to young women, so I want to see the longest possible sentence.

Two fantastic posts this morning by @HollyHunter9 and @Kasmeer

Kas post above summarises my thoughts exactly!! In a much better way than I could have put it!!

I too am certain he killed Libby, but the bits in the case that I can’t work out have probably caused me to look deeper in to why it didn’t happen the way we think rather than the way it did.

Hopefully the picture will change further next week when the defence starts and then gets picked apart!

 

[JosieJo]

If I was a jury member, based on the evidence shown so far and limited, neutral-toned discussion: Guilty

If my jury discussion was based on this thread though: Guilty of rape, not guilty of murder.

Why? It's an interesting psychological effect I often notice in myself: if I'm undecided on something, seeing attacks or condescending attitudes will not convince me, but push me the other way and make me dig in harder on the points I disagree on, and can make me lose sight of the big picture (in other cases they can make me more and more strong in my view which was already opposing). So reading the repeated suggestions that by questioning anything, posters are unreasonable, wanting to believe his innocence etc, makes me feel equally attacked for sharing the views which led to such comments.

And that in turn leads me to really hyperfocus on the problems with the evidence: quite simply it has not been proved that Libby died by the hand of a person rather than that of Mother Nature, and it has certainly not been proved how 7.5 minutes could be enough for rape, murder, carrying a healthy adult woman some distance to a river, getting her into the river, getting self back out of the river and getting back to the car (some suggestions for timing are good theories, but not proof, and I think it's been repeatedly said here that the jury aren't meant to make up their own evidence or scenarios...). Later posts clearly summing the whole thing up make me realise I'm stuck on the details, and it's most likely on the whole that he is guilty, but these details are important ones which would make it very hard for me to honestly say the case has been proved.

I'm saying all this, not to attack anyone, but more to say I really hope there aren't people on the jury whose brains work like mine! As jurors like me combined with anyone too condescending about refusing to accept that other views or questions may be valid (which based on most internet forums is pretty common in the general population ) could result in no verdict or worse. And I don't want him to get away with it: despite my opinion about the level of proof, I am certain he's responsible for Libby's death, and very likely by murder, while it's quite clear he'll continue to be very very dangerous to young women, so I want to see the longest possible sentence.

This is so true being the sort of person who really struggles with wanting clear evidence i have to really focus on the "likelihood" and the fact that the rape and her being left in a freezing park he deserves the longest sentence anyway

 

[Dotta]

Hello to everybody on this thread I am a new poster writing my very first post although I have been browsing through Websleuths for a few years now. I am from Poland. I am just wondering how come police got hold of PR? Did someone inform them about their suspicions about him? Or was he a person of interest because of his earlier incidents?

 

[motherofdaughters]

If you think not guilty of murder - how do you think Libby died?

I personally think he was responsible but there’s not enough evidence to prove unequivocally and therefore my duty would be to find not guilty.